DES SIP Template 2011 2012 by V06YRnQh

VIEWS: 8 PAGES: 33

									Lyon County School District
                       Dayton Elementary School
               285 Dayton Valley Road, Dayton, NV 89403
                  775-246-6262/775-246-6264 (FAX)


                                SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TEMPLATE
                                             NRS 385

                                  For Implementation in 2011-2012




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                 Page 1 of 33
School Improvement Planning Team
     ALL Title I schools must have a parent on their SIP team that is NOT a district employee.
     Indicate this member with an asterisk.

                                        Name of Member                                               Position
    Cory Sandberg                                                                      Principal
    Wanda Chambers                                                                     ESL Teacher
    Christina Reid                                                                     Special Education Teacher
    Karon Dutcher                                                                      Teacher
    Sono Allander                                                                      Teacher
    Angie Beaty                                                                        Teacher
    Becky Thiel                                                                        Teacher

    Amanda Crawford                                                                    Data person
    Cindy Darden                                                                       Teacher
                                                                                       Parent




Submission Date: September 30, 2011                                           Reviewer: Keith Savage, Deputy Superintendent




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                Page 2 of 33
School: Dayton Elementary School                                          District: Lyon County School District
Principal: Cory Sandberg                                                  School Year: 2011-2012
Address: 285 Dayton Valley Rd, Dayton, NV 89403                           Phone: 775-246-6262
                                                                          Email: csandberg@lyon.k12.nv.us

                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS                                    Page #



      Part I: Vision of Learning                                                                       4
     Part II: Inquiry Process: Evidence of Development of the SIP                                      6
              (Comprehensive Needs Assessment)
    Part III: SIP Goals & Measurable Objectives                                                        11
     Part IV: School Improvement Master Plan (Reform Strategies):                                      13
                   Goal 1: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan                                               13
                   Goal 2: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan                                               14
                   Goal 3: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan                                               17
      Part V: Budget for the Overall Cost of Carrying Out the Plan                                     19
     Part VI: Evaluation of the SIP                                                                    20
    Part VII: Other Required Elements & Assurances of the SIP (All schools)                            24
   Part VIII: Required Elements & Assurances for Title I Schools                                       28
    Part IX: Additional Required Elements & Assurances for Non-Title I Schools                         30

 Appendix A: School Profile (Accountability Report, Other Data)                                        31
Attachments: Parent Involvement Chart                                                                  32




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                     Page 3 of 33
Part I: VISION FOR LEARNING
The Lyon County Board of School Trustees is dedicated to keeping the District vision and mission alive. It is the basis
for everything they do. They are committed to find more and better ways to serve students of Lyon County.

                                                      District Vision or Mission Statement

             EVERYONE working together to move our students’ achievements toward great accomplishments.

The Lyon County Board of School Trustees, Administrators, Teachers, and School Staff will assure that every student
can learn and achieve the skills necessary to be proficient in academic, vocational and social disciplines. Public education
is a collaborative effort between the Lyon County School District and parents/guardians as stakeholders to teach the
skills that are essential for every student to be life-long learners and productive citizens in our ever changing and
diverse society.
                                                                District Goal 1
Curriculum: Increase achievement for all students in math and English language arts through a curriculum aligned to Common Core standards as
measured by Nevada AYP standards in June 2011, such that there will be at least a 10-15% decrease in non-proficient students in each AYP
group.




                                                                District Goal 2
Instruction: Increase and enhance the rigor of classroom instructional practices and programs to improve performance and enable students to
meet their academic targets as measured by Nevada AYP standards in June 2011, such that there will be at least a 10-15% decrease in non-
proficient students in each AYP group.
                                                                District Goal 3
Achievement/Assessment: Increase the enrollment of LCSD graduates in post secondary institutions by August 2011 as measured by a 5-10%
increase in NSHE.




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                         Page 4 of 33
VISION FOR LEARNING (continued)

                                                      School Vision or Mission Statement

 Dayton Elementary School will partner with parents and community to foster motivated, independent learners in a
 safe and integrated learning environment where students can achieve their highest potential through consistent,
                                             high quality instruction.

                                                                 School Highlights
School highlights spotlight the successes, honors, and unique features of the school. They include important accomplishments to be acknowledged by the
staff and school community. Highlights should focus on school-wide accomplishments rather than individual student accomplishments, should have an
academic focus, and should describe the educational benefit to students and the school community. Ex. At Lyon High School collaborative team-
taught special education classes are offered in all content areas and ELL collaborative team-taught classes are offered in English, math and science in an
effort to increase student achievement targeting special education and ELL students. Additionally, a study skills program is offered at all grade levels in
an effort to assist students with the development of academic skills and self-advocacy skills necessary for postsecondary education.
    1.  Dayton Elementary School uses Write From The Beginning writing program. This program is implemented in grades K-5 and
       scaffolds throughout. Primary teachers are to provide direct instruction 15-30 minutes a minimum of four days per week with
       upper grades providing direct instruction 30-60 minutes a minimum of three days per week. This will ensure Common Core
       Standards and Write From The Beginning Program are working together.
    2. CRT test scores over the past three years have also showed great improvement. Dayton Elementary School has implemented
       Balanced Math and we believe that this is part of the reason for our 78.6% of student in grades 3-5 being proficient on the
       standardized test.
    3. Dayton Elementary School has a teacher that is working closely with grades K-2 in reading. The teacher will collaborate with other
       teachers, identify student’s weaknesses and work either one on one or small group to intervene.
    4. At Dayton Elementary School, we are using Essential Skills Software/Study Island to work with students during their computer
       time, in their classroom or at home to provide additional Common Core support. Essential Skills is used to work on improving lowest
       strand while Study Island is used to support common core standards.
    5. Dayton Elementary School is continuing with ESL services as an inclusion model. We have one teacher and one aide that work
       collaboratively in classrooms. Our ESL Teacher uses effective teaching strategies for the ESL students which help all students to
       be successful in the regular classroom. The ESL teacher also shares best practices with classroom teachers and provides
       professional development in that area as well.
    6. Dayton Elementary School special education teachers will be collaborating with teachers and co-teaching to help better meet the
       needs of the children in special education as they participate in regular classrooms. As part of the process, they will discuss
       curriculum, assessments and use best practices such as pre-teaching and re-teaching.

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                         Page 5 of 33
    7. Dayton Elementary School will use 75% of its late-starts so teachers can collaborate/plan for curriculum, instruction and
       assessment. This time allows teachers to share ideas, discuss DOK, ensure they are teaching appropriate standards and providing
       best practices in instruction.
    8. Dayton Elementary School uses the Instructional Consultation process to increase, enhance and improve student and staff
       performance.
    9.   Dayton Elementary School is very proud that we have made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) this past year.

    10. 2011 CRT scores in reading indicate 27.4% of our 3 rd grade and 33.8% of our 5th grade EXCEED standards.



    PART II: INQUIRY PROCESS: Evidence of Development of the SIP (Comprehensive Needs Assessment)


    Comprehensive Needs Assessment
    Based on a complete analysis of the data, list the key strength and priority concerns in student performance, instructional and
    remediation practices, and program implementation for ALL students in ALL grade levels.

                                                                  Key Strengths
                                                      (to sustain in the school improvement plan)
    Key strengths should evaluate growth in performance for all subgroups, address progress made at ALL performance levels, and assess progress
    from prior years. This depth of analysis will enable the school to make instructional decisions to benefit all students. All students attending the
    school should be included in this analysis. Ex. Students who were identified as “struggling” or “emerging” in reading, based on scores from the fall
    administration of DIBELS, were provided small group differentiated instruction during their reading block and were provided additional
    instructional support during the school day. This resulted in an increase in the percent of students who scored “on track” at every grade level.
    Specifically, the grade levels increased by the following percentages: K = 23%, 1st Grade = 5%, 2nd Grade = 8%, 3rd Grade = 16%, 4th Grade =
    17%, and 5th Grade = 17%.
         1. When comparing the data from the academic years 2008-2009 to 2010-2011 the following strengths were apparent on
            the Nevada State Writing Proficiency (Tier I) and our school-wide Write From The Beginning bi-annual assessments
            (Tier II).
                 Using the Thinking Maps and WFTB programs with fidelity over a three year period yielded higher than district
                     and state average writing proficiency on the NV State Writing Proficiency. The fifth grade students showed
                     60% proficiency in 2008, 58% proficiency in 2009, 65.8% proficiency in 2010 and 56.5% proficiency in 2011.
         2. According to CRT data, Math proficiency scores have continued to increase over the past three years (2009 – 67%,
            2010 – 77%, 2011 – 78.6%).
                 IEP students grew from 27% proficient in 2008 to 52% proficient in 2010 and 69% proficient in 2011 (42%
                       growth in last two years.).

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                           Page 6 of 33
                LEP students grew from 48% in 2008 to 75% proficient in 2011 proficient in 2010 (27% growth).
         3. Dayton Elementary School has maintained a level of meeting target reading scores within the: White/Caucasian,
            American Indian and Asian Pacific sub population for the past three years.
                IEP students grew from 39.6% proficient in 2009 to 44.6% proficient in 2010 and 48.8% proficient in 2011 (9%
                  growth).
                LEP students grew from 33.9% proficient in 2010 to 45.8% proficient in 2011 (12% growth).
                Grade 3 has 27.4% students exceeding the standard while Grade 5 has 33.8% of its students exceeding the
                  standard as measured by the 2011 CRTs.

    5.


                                                                Priority Concerns
    Priority concerns should focus on significant gaps between subgroups, or gaps in instruction, curriculum, and interventions supported by data.
    After reviewing the data, the SIP team determines the most critical barriers to increased achievement and prioritizes them for further analysis.
    Priority concerns are the basis for determining root causes and identifying solutions.
    Reading
     CRT and MAP data in reading show that student growth has been stagnant during the last three years.
     Our IEP and LEP subgroup has shown overall growth in reading over the past three years, however, they are still 33%
    below the target score as measured by CRT’s.
     CRT scores show that 42.9% of LEP students, 52.6% of Hispanic students, 43.2% of IEP students are proficient in reading,
    however, these subgroups scored significantly below on DOK 2 and DOK 3 questions as compared to DOK 1 questions as
    measured by 2011.
     Our LEP subgroup has a significant gap (12%) in content cluster C4, Comprehend, Interpret/Evaluate Informational Text,
    for 3, 4, and 5 as compared to the school as a whole when measured by CRT’s.
    Mathematics
    CRT scores show that overall students scores are significantly below on DOK 2 and DOK 3 questions as compared to DOK 1
    questions as measured by 2011 CRT scores.
    Data
     Dayton Elementary School did not use common assessments in reading or math aside from MAPs testing. More data is
    needed to help make decisions on student interventions and to help guide teacher instruction.

    Writing

        Descriptive language and transitions has been identified by all grade levels as an area that scores consistently low as

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                          Page 7 of 33
    evidenced by our Writing Samples scored by our WFTB rubric.
     Writing Samples and 5th Grade Writing Proficiency data indicate that conventions (primary- punctuation/capitalization,
    upper- varied sentence structure) and organization are areas of weakness.
     2011 5th Grade Writing Proficiency data indicate that 25% of IEP students, 33.3% of LEP students, and 35% of Hispanic
    students scored proficient as compared to the school proficiency of 56.6%.
     Beginning 2012, the 5th Grade Writing Proficiency will be a one day exam on the computer. Students are lacking
    keyboarding and word processing skills, along with the ability to compose a piece of writing in one setting.
     There is a lack of fidelity in using our WFTB program. Certain grades use mini-lessons on a regular basis while others do
    not. All teachers have been trained, however, we have not set expectations for each grade level. We have also had several
    different trainers over the past five school years. Consistency has been missing. 5th Grade Writing Proficiencies have been
    57%, 65% and 56% over the past three school years.




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                      Page 8 of 33
    INQUIRY PROCESS (continued)

    Verification of Causes – Root Cause Analysis
    For each concern, verify the root causes that impact or impede the priority concerns. Identify research-based solutions that address the
    priority concerns. For each priority concern, identify a maximum of two root causes that impact or impede student achievement. Root causes
    focus on the adult actions in the school, verified with evidence (data) to support the cause. Continue analyzing each cause until the root of the
    concern is reached using the five questions in the SIG. Only by understanding the root cause of the concern, can effective solutions for
    increasing student achievement be determined. After a root cause has been identified, propose one research-based solution for each root
    cause that describes the instructional practice(s) to be implemented in the action plan. Solutions are global and should not be confused with
    “strategies” that belong in the action steps.

              Priority Concerns                                       Root Causes                                            Solutions
    Reading                                            Reading                                               Reading
        1. CRT and MAP data in reading show that       There is a lack of fidelity in our reading program.        Teachers will use the pre and post
            student growth has been stagnant           Grades K-3 use Rigby, grades 4-5 have no                      common core assessments to evaluate
            during the last three years.               adopted reading program. CRT and MAP data in                  student progress.
        2. Our IEP and LEP subgroup has shown          reading show that student growth has been                  Reading remediation will be aligned
            overall growth in reading over the past    stagnant during the last three years                          with students identified weaknesses.
            three years, however, they are still 33%        There has been minimal training and                  Teachers will be provided with
            below the target score as measured by               support for teachers at the DOK 2 and 3              professional development, support,
            CRT’s.                                              levels.                                              and resources to develop a
        3. CRT scores show that 42.9% of LEP                IEP/ELL students do not have enough                     comprehensive program to incorporate
            students, 52.6% of Hispanic students,               access to grade level curriculum.                    higher order thinking skills and
            43.2% of IEP students are proficient in         Inadequate collaboration between                        strategies (DOK2 and DOK3) into daily
            Reading, however, these subgroups                   SPED/ELL and classroom teacher.                      classroom reading instruction,
            scored significantly below on DOK 2             Teachers may not have strategies that                   assignments, and assessments.
            and DOK 3 questions as compared to                  address main idea based on evidence;              Special education, ELL and regular
            DOK 1 questions as measured by 2011.                identify theme, cause and effect, and a              education teachers will collaborate and
        4. Our LEP subgroup has a significant gap               problem and a solution.                              use an inclusion model as a best
            (12%) in content cluster 4,                                                                              practice to better ensure access to
            Comprehend, Interpret/Evaluate                                                                           grade level curriculum.
            Informational Text, for 3, 4, and 5 as                                                                Teachers will SIOP best practices.
            compared to the school as a whole                                                                     Teachers will be provided professional
            when measured by CRT’s.                                                                                  development on Main Idea and other
        5. Proficiency in Reading content cluster                                                                    Content Cluster 4 components.
            C4, Comprehend, Interpret/Evaluate
            Informational Text, is low compared to
            the other content clusters as measured

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                              Page 9 of 33
              by CRT and MAP data.
                                                        Math                                                  Math
    Mathematics                                                  There has been minimal training and                  Teachers will be provided professional
    CRT scores show that overall students scores are              support for teachers on DOK 2 and 3                   development , support, and resources
    significantly below on DOK 2 and DOK 3                        questions as well as a lack of consistent             to develop a comprehensive program
    questions as compared to DOK 1 questions as                   resources to teach at the DOK 2 and 3                 to incorporate higher order thinking
    measured by 2011 CRT scores.                                  levels                                                skills and strategies (DOK2 and DOK3)
                                                                                                                        into daily classroom math instruction,
                                                                                                                        assignments, and assessments. on DOK
                                                                                                                        2 and 3 activities.

                                                        Data                                                  Data
    Data                                                         Lack of collaboration time for grade                 Student Achievement Conferences will
             Dayton Elementary School did not use                levels teachers to create common                      be held quarterly to collaborate
              common assessments in reading or                    assessments for Reading and Math.                     on student progress as reflected by our
              math aside from MAPs testing. More                 Lack of time to administer assessments,               common assessments in Reading and
              data is needed to help make decisions               training on how to administer                         Math.
              on student interventions and to help                assessments, and agreement on what                   Teachers meet a minimum of one time
              guide teacher instruction.                          needs to be collected by each grade                   per week for grade level collaboration
                                                                  level.                                                to discuss curriculum, assessments, and
                                                                                                                        instruction.



                                                        Writing                                               Writing
    Writing
                                                                 Lack of modeling, lack of consistency                Set and monitor
             Descriptive language and transitions                among grade levels, need more                         expectations/guidelines for the WFTB
              has been identified by all grade levels             application of descriptive language and               program for all staff.
              as an area that scores consistently low             need to write into daily schedule                    Implement a keyboarding program
              as evidenced by our Writing Samples                Students have not been held                           beginning in second grade.
              scored by our WFTB rubric.                          accountable for using correct                        Hold students accountable for using
        
                                     th
              Writing Samples and 5 Grade Writing                 conventions of print on a daily basis.                correct conventions of print on a daily
              Proficiency data indicate that                     Teachers not providing enough                         basis in all subject areas.
              conventions (primary-                               opportunities for vocabulary                         Vocabulary Acquisition Solution:???
              punctuation/capitalization, upper-                  acquisition for our Hispanic and IEP
              varied sentence structure) and                      students.
              organization are areas of weakness.                No keyboarding program implemented.
        
                     th
              2011 5 Grade Writing Proficiency data              There is a lack of fidelity in using our
              indicate that 25% of IEP students,                  WFTB program. Certain grades use
              33.3% of LEP students, and 35% of                   mini-lessons on a regular basis while
              Hispanic students scored proficient as              others do not. Consistency has been

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                                  Page 10 of 33
             compared to the school proficiency of       missing.
             56.6%.
        
                                    th
             Beginning 2012, the 5 Grade Writing
             Proficiency will be a one day exam on
             the computer. Students are lacking
             keyboarding and word processing skills,
             along with the ability to compose a
             piece of writing in one setting.




    Part III: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GOALS                         AND   MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES
    Convert the top priority concerns into the goal(s) for improvement and incorporate the identified solutions into the action plan.



    Goal 1: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in English/Language Arts for all students to meet
    proficiency targets as measured by the 2012 CRT and MAP data, with an emphasis on our IEP and LEP subgroups in the area
    of Comprehend, Interpret and Evaluate Informational Text, and Depth of Knowledge levels DOK 2 and DOK 3.

    Measurable Objective 1: All students at DES, with an emphasis on LEP and IEP subgroups, will increase reading
    proficiency to 75.9% as measured by the 2012 Spring CRT and MAP data. Subgroups performing at or above targets will
    increase 5-10% based on 2010-2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency. Subgroups performing below
    targets will demonstrate 15-25% increases, based on their previous performance to close the achievement gap.

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                             Page 11 of 33
    (Add additional rows for measurable objectives if needed.)



    Goal 2: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in math for all students to meet proficiency
    targets as measured by the 2012 CRT and MAP data with an emphasis in all content areas in grades K-5 increasing the Depth of
    Knowledge levels DOK 2 and DOK 3.
    Measurable Objective 2: All students at DES, with an emphasis on the IEP subgroup, will increase math proficiency to
    77.1% as measured by the 2012 Spring CRT and MAP data. Subgroups performing at or above targets will increase 5-10%
    based on 2010-2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency. Subgroups performing below targets will
    demonstrate 10-15% increases, based on their previous performance to close the achievement gap.


    (Add additional rows for measurable objectives if needed.)

    Goal 3 (if applicable): Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in writing for all students to meet
    proficiency targets as measured by the 2012 4th/5th Grade Writing Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing Samples,
    especially our IEP and Hispanic subgroups, with an emphasis on Conventions (primary: punctuation/capitalization, upper:
    varied sentence structure).
    Measurable Objective 3: All students at DES will increase writing proficiency to 78% as measured by the 2012 4th/5th
    Grade Writing Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing Samples. Subgroups performing below targets will demonstrate
    20-25% increases, based on their previous performance to close the achievement gap. Subgroups performing at or above targets
    will increase 5-10% based on 2010-2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency.


    (Add additional rows for measurable objectives if needed.)




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                      Page 12 of 33
Part IV: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MASTER PLAN & REFORM STRATEGIES
For each goal and its measurable objective(s), the SIP team identifies a maximum of ten action steps to accomplish the goal. Each student-centered
action step describes a learning outcome and associated strategies to ensure that students achieve the goal. Each adult-focused action step describes how
the professional staff will implement a systemic change in teaching practices to ensure student achievement. Each action step directly relates to a solution
developed in the inquiry process. Action steps should identify different strategies to address the varying needs identified in the goals and measurable
objectives. When creating action steps the professional development needed to ensure effective instruction for each step is identified in the
resources needed for implementation column. Professional development supports the knowledge required to implement the instructional strategies,
curriculum, programs, and interventions needed to increase student achievement.
Monitoring Plan: Identify the data that will be collected to monitor the action steps, as well as the timeline and the person(s) responsible.


Goal 1: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in English/Language Arts for all students to meet
proficiency targets as measured by the 2012 CRT and MAP data, with an emphasis on our IEP and LEP subgroups in the area of
Comprehend, Interpret and Evaluate Informational Text, and Depth of Knowledge levels DOK 2 and DOK 3.

Measurable Objective(s): All students at DES, with an emphasis on LEP and IEP subgroups, will increase reading proficiency to
75.9% as measured by the 2012 Spring CRT and MAP data. Subgroups performing at or above targets will increase 5-10% based on
2010-2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency. Subgroups performing below targets will demonstrate 15-25%
increases, based on their previous performance to close the achievement gap.
                                        ACTION PLAN                                                                MONITORING PLAN
Action Steps                                  Resources          Timeline       Person(s)           Monitoring         Timeline for      Person(s)
to implement the solutions/strategies         e.g., money,       for            Responsible         Measures           monitoring the    Responsible
                                              people,            implementing   Who is the person   Identify data      progress of       Who is the person
                                              facilities to be   action steps   or group who will   sources            each action       or group who will
                                              used for                          ensure that each                       step.             ensure that the
                                              implementation                    action step is                                           progress is
                                                                                implemented?                                             monitored?
1.1 Targeted first and second grade           Collaboration      September-     Teacher/Classroo    DRA/MAP            Quarterly for     Classroom
students will increase their reading skills   time, Common       May,           m Teacher           strand data        DRA/Sept,         Teachers
to grade level by participating in small      Core ELA                                              Lesson Plans       Dec, May for      Principal
group/individual instruction.                 Standards                                             Classroom          MAP data
                                              Grades 1 and 2                                        Walkthrough        Weekly CWT
                                              CAFÉ, DRA, RR                                         Data (CWT)         data

1.2 To improve DOK 2 and 3 levels,            Common Core        Daily          Classroom           Lesson Plans       Twice per         Classroom


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                         Page 13 of 33
students will participate in interactive     ELA Standards                  Teachers             CWT data       month          teacher, Principal,
instruction that uses research based         Thinking MAPs                                       Student work                  S.A.C.,
practices, including Thinking Maps,          Daily 5                                             samples
Marzano’s Student Engagement                 DOK Questions
Strategies and higher order questioning.     Prof. Develop.
1.3 At a minimum of four times per week,     Inclusive/Co-    Three times   Principal, SPED      Lesson Plans   Quarterly      Principal, SPED
targeted IEP students will participate in    teaching prof.    per week,    teachers,            CWT data                      teachers,
inclusive general education instruction in   development,     September -   Classroom            Student work                  Classroom
reading.                                     collaboration       May        Teachers             samples                       Teachers
                                             time                                                IEP records
                                                                                                 MAP data
1.4 All students will participate at a       SIOP training,   Three times   Principal, SIOP      Lesson Plans   Quarterly      Classroom teacher
minimum of three times per day in hands-     thinking maps,   per day       trainer, classroom   CWT data                      Principal
on activities and/or best language                            September-    teacher
practices including student conversation,                     May
graphic organizers and accessing and
building background knowledge.
1.5 Targeted at-risk students in grades 3-   Collaboration    Sept. – May   Teacher              3-5 Common     Quarterly      Teacher
5 will participate in pull-out reading       time             Three times   Classroom teacher    Assessment     DRA.           Classroom teacher
groups focusing on their weakest             Common Core      per week                           MAP strand     Sept., Dec.,   Principal
strand/standard/content cluster.             ELA Standards                                       data           May
                                             Grades 3-5                                          CWT data       MAP data
                                                                                                 Lesson Plans   CWT data
1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

1.10




SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MASTER PLAN (Continued)



007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                               Page 14 of 33
Goal 2: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in math for all students to meet proficiency targets as
measured by the 2012 CRT and MAP data, especially our IEP subgroup, with an emphasis on Number Sense and increasing the Depth
of Knowledge levels DOK 2 and DOK 3.

Measurable Objective(s): All students at DES, with an emphasis on the IEP subgroup, will increase Math proficiency to 80% as
measured by the 2011 Spring CRT and MAP data. Subgroups performing at or above targets will increase 5-10% based on 2009-2010
levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency. Subgroups performing below targets will demonstrate 10-15% increases, based
on their previous performance to close the achievement gap.

                                        ACTION PLAN                                                          MONITORING PLAN
Action Steps                                 Resources          Timeline       Person(s)          Monitoring      Timeline for     Person(s)
to implement the solutions/strategies        e.g., money,       for            Responsible        Measures        monitoring       Responsible
                                             people,            implementing   Who is the         Identify data   the progress     Who is the
                                             facilities to be   action steps   person or group    sources         of each action   person or group
                                             used for                          who will ensure                    step.            who will ensure
                                             implementation                    that each action                                    that the
                                                                               step is                                             progress is
                                                                               implemented?                                        monitored?
2.1 Students will participate daily in       Classroom          Sept. – May    Classroom          Topic Test      Sept, Jan,       Classroom
components of Balanced Math to increase      Teacher,                          Teacher            MAP strand      May MAP data     Teacher
DOK 2 and 3 levels.                          Balanced Math                                        data                             S.A.C.
                                             materials,                                           CWT data                         Principal
                                             collaboration                                        Number Sense
                                             time                                                 Activities
                                             Common Core                                          Data Analysis
                                             Standards                                            Thinking Maps

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                 Page 15 of 33
2.9

2.10




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007   Page 16 of 33
School Improvement Master Plan (Continued)


Goal 3: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will increase student achievement in writing for all students to meet proficiency targets as
measured by the 2012 4th/5th Grade Writing Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing Samples, especially our IEP and Hispanic
subgroups, with an emphasis on Conventions (primary: punctuation/capitalization, upper: varied sentence structure).

Measurable Objective(s): All students at DES will increase Writing proficiency to 78% as measured by the 2012 4th/5th Grade
Writing Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing Samples. Subgroups performing below targets will demonstrate 20-25%
increases, based on their previous performance to close the achievement gap. Subgroups performing at or above targets will increase 5-
10% based on 2010-2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining proficiency.

                                        ACTION PLAN                                                           MONITORING PLAN
Action Steps                                 Resources          Timeline        Person(s)          Monitoring          Timeline       Person(s)
to implement the solutions/strategies        e.g., money,       for             Responsible        Measures            for            Responsible
                                             people,            implementing    Who is the         Identify data       monitoring     Who is the
                                             facilities to be   action steps.   person or group    sources.            the            person or group
                                             used for                           who will ensure                        progress       who will ensure
                                             implementation                     that each action                       of each        that the
                                                                                step is                                action         progress is
                                                                                implemented?                           step.          monitored?
3.1 Students will participate daily in       WFTB               Sept.- May      Teachers,          Thinking Map with   Weekly         Teacher,
direct writing instruction and               Trainers,                          Principal, WFTB    minimum of rough    lesson         Principal
guided/independent practice, with an         teachers,                          Trainers           draft monthly,      plans,
emphasis on conventions                      WFTB,                                                 lesson plans,       monthly
(capitalization/punctuation) and varied      writingfix.com,                                                           rough
sentence structure following the WFTB        Common Core                                                               draft
program. Primary (K-2) 15-30 minutes a       Standards,
minimum of four days per week. Upper         Thinking Maps
grades (3-5) 30-60 minutes a minimum of
three days per week.
3.2 Students will use the writing process    WFTB               Sept.-May       Teachers,          Three scored        Sept., Jan.,   Teachers,
outlined in Write From The Beginning to      Trainers,                          Principal          student writing     May            Principal
complete three writing samples. Teachers     teachers,                                             samples.
will self-evaluate and peer-evaluate their   common core
writing samples using the WFTB rubric.       standards,


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                    Page 17 of 33
                                             thinking maps

3.3 Students will be held accountable for    Teacher,        Sept.-May   Teachers,   Student classwork.   Monthly   Teachers,
using conventions in all disciplines.        Common Core                 Principal                                  Principal
                                             Standards
3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                  Page 18 of 33
Part V: BUDGET FOR THE OVERALL COST OF CARRYING OUT PLAN
List the funds necessary to carry out the school improvement plan and accomplish the goals.


Goals                   Total amount needed to                 Funds available in current     Funds still needed to
                           accomplish Goal.                  school funding that have been      implement goal.
                                                             specifically set aside for the
                     (Amounts for each action step            implementation of the goal.
                   should be listed under “Resources.”)


                  $7,000                                  $2,500 Subs for School
                                                          Improvement meetings/data
                                                          $4,000 Nonfiction
Goal 1                                                    texts/literature support
                                                          $500 Update DRA kits


                  $3,500                                  $2,500 Subs for School
                                                          Improvement meetings/data
                                                          $1,000 Balanced Math resources
Goal 2


                  $3,500                                  $2,500 Subs for School
                                                          Improvement meetings/data
                                                          $1,000 Subs for scoring student
Goal 3                                                    writing samples
(if applicable)




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                              Page 19 of 33
Part VI: EVALUATION OF THE SIP
For each goal and measurable objective(s), identify Evaluation Measures (Measures of Success & Outcome Data) that will be collected and analyzed.
Measures of Success describe specific measures and strategies to analyze performance, and compare actual with anticipated outcomes. Outcome
Data (evidence) that refer to assessment sources in the plan including formative and summative data results that support student achievement.
Person(s) Responsible analyze data to link strategies to achievement, and make connections to the solutions and action steps identified in the plan.
Timeline outlines at which point data will be collected, analyzed, and communicated to staff.
Reminder:        Monitoring maintains focus on the action step. The monitoring of action steps differs from the evaluation plan. The evaluation plan is reflective of
                 a year-long process to measure the effectiveness of the school improvement plan to increase student achievement.



                     GOAL 1                                           Evaluation Measures                      Person(s) Responsible                Timeline
Measurable Objective 1                                        Measures of Success & Outcome Data
Measurable Objective 2
Goal 1 Dayton Elementary School (DES) will                   1.MAP assessment data for all                     1.   Regular Ed.                1.   Spring
increase student achievement in                              students with an additional focus on                   Staff, SpEd
English/Language Arts for all students to meet               IEP and LEP                                            Staff, ELL
proficiency targets as measured by the 2012 CRT                   Review item analysis report                      staff
and MAP data, with an emphasis on our IEP and                        for fall, winter and spring
LEP subgroups in the area of Comprehend,                             MAP assessments for IEP
Interpret and Evaluate Informational Text, and                       and LEP students to analyze                                               2. Aggregate of
Depth of Knowledge levels DOK 2 and DOK 3.                           student performance.                      2. Grade level                     quarterly
Measurable Objective 1 All students at DES,                  2.Classroom assessment scores                        teachers with                   common
with an emphasis on LEP and IEP subgroups, will                   Compare by subgroups the                       administrators                  assessment
increase reading proficiency to 75.9% as                             achieved growth in classroom                                                 and DRA data
measured by the 2012 Spring CRT and MAP data.                        assessments with anticipated                                                 May 2012.
Subgroups performing at or above targets will                        growth identified in SIP.
increase 5-10% based on 2010-2011 levels, to                 3.Implementation of the SPED
remain on track for maintaining proficiency.                 inclusion model and ESL push-in                   3. SpEd Staff,                  3. May 2012
Subgroups performing below targets will                      program relative to student scores.                  ELL staff and
demonstrate 15-25% increases, based on their                      Identify fidelity of                           administration
previous performance to close the achievement                        implementation of programs
gap.                                                                 by comparing measures of
                                                                     student success on MAPS,
                                                                     CRTS, and common
                                                                     assessments.



007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                                      Page 20 of 33
                                                      4.Best Practices Classroom Walk        4. Administration      4. May 2012
                                                      Through data (CWT).                       and SIP team
                                                           Collate CWT data for levels
                                                             of student engagement,
                                                             student conversation,
                                                             graphic organizers and
                                                             accessing background
                                                             knowledge, DOK levels, Daily
                                                             5 and Balanced Math             5. Grade level         5. May 2012
                                                      5.Student Achievement Conferences         teacher,               Aggregate of
                                                      (SAC) for student performance             principal,             quarterly
                                                           Collaborative meeting               counselor,             meeting
                                                             records, common assessment         SpEd, ELL,             results
                                                             data, collaboration for            Title 1, Reading
                                                             student’s continued                Remediation
                                                             improvement
                                                      6. CRT scores on DOK 2 and 3           6. Administration      6. August 2011
                                                           Determine changes in                and SIP team
                                                             percentages of correct
                                                             answers of DOK 2 and 3
                                                             questions to identify
                                                             strategies that resulted in
                                                             success.
Goal 2 Dayton Elementary School (DES) will            1.MAP assessment data for all            1.   Regular Ed.    1.   Fall, Winter,
increase student achievement in math for all          students with an additional focus on          Staff, SpEd         Spring
students to meet proficiency targets as               IEP and LEP                                   Staff, ELL
measured by the 2012 CRT and MAP data with an              Review item analysis report             staff
emphasis on Number Sense in grades K-5                       for spring MAP assessments
increasing the Depth of Knowledge levels DOK 2               for IEP and LEP students to
and DOK 3.                                                   analyze student
Measurable Objective: All students at DES, with              performance.                      2. Grade level      2. Aggregate of
an emphasis on the IEP subgroup, will increase        2.Classroom assessment scores               teachers            quarterly
Math proficiency to 80% as measured by the                 Compare by subgroups the              with admini-        common
2012 Spring CRT and MAP data. Subgroups                      achieved growth in classroom         strators            assessment
performing at or above targets will increase 5-              assessments with anticipated                             data May
10% based on 2010-2011 levels, to remain on                  growth identified in SIP.                                2012.
track for maintaining proficiency. Subgroups          3.Implementation of the SPED             3. SpEd Staff,      3. MAP and CRTs

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                          Page 21 of 33
performing below targets will demonstrate 10-         inclusion model and ESL push-in              ELL staff            May 2012
15% increases, based on their previous                program relative to student scores.          and admini-
performance to close the achievement gap.                  Identify fidelity of                   stration
                                                              implementation of programs
                                                              by comparing measures of
                                                              student success on MAPS,
                                                              CRTS, and common
                                                              assessments.
                                                      4.Best Practices Classroom Walk         4. Administra-      4. May 2012
                                                      Through data (CWT).                        tion and SIP
                                                           Collate CWT data for levels          team
                                                              of student engagement,
                                                              student conversation,
                                                              graphic organizers and
                                                              accessing background            5. Grade level      5.     May 2012
                                                              knowledge, DOK levels, Daily       teacher,               Aggregate of
                                                              5 and Balanced Math                principal,             quarterly
                                                      5.Student Achievement Conferences          counselor.             meeting
                                                      (SAC) for student performance              As                     results
                                                           Collaborative meeting                necessary:
                                                              records, common assessment         SpEd, ELL,
                                                              data, collaboration for            Title 1,
                                                              student’s continued                Reading
                                                              improvement                        Remediation
                                                      6. CRT scores on DOK 2 and 3
                                                      Determine changes in percentages of     6. Administra-      6.    August 2011
                                                      correct answers of DOK 2 and 3               tion and SIP
                                                      questions to identify strategies that        team
                                                      resulted in success.
Goal 3: Dayton Elementary School (DES) will               1. Scored student writing           1.    Grade level    1.    May 2012
increase student achievement in writing for all               samples.                             teacher
students to meet proficiency targets as                    Teachers will evaluate
measured by the 2012 4 th/5th Grade Writing                   student pre-post writing
Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing                    samples with an emphasis on
Samples, especially our IEP and Hispanic                      conventions.
subgroups, with an emphasis on Conventions                2. Student Achievement              2.    Principal,     2.    May 2012
(primary: punctuation/capitalization, upper:                  Conferences (SAC) for                data person,

007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                         Page 22 of 33
varied sentence structure).                              student performance               grade level
Measurable Objective(s): All students at DES            Aggregate of collaborative        teacher,
will increase Writing proficiency to 78% as              meeting records, common           SpEd
measured by the 2012 4th/5th Grade Writing               assessment data,                  teacher, ESL
Proficiency and K-5 Quarterly WFTB Writing               collaboration for student’s       teacher
Samples. Subgroups performing below targets              continued improvement          3. Grade level    3. February
will demonstrate 20-25% increases, based on           3. 4th/5th Grade Writing             teacher,          2012
their previous performance to close the                  Proficiency                       SpEd
achievement gap. Subgroups performing at or            Will help identify growth in       teacher, ESL
above targets will increase 5-10% based on 2010-         conventions with an emphasis      teacher,
2011 levels, to remain on track for maintaining          on Hispanic and IEP students      Principal
proficiency.




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                             Page 23 of 33
Part VII: Other Required Elements & Assurances of the SIP (All schools)

Section A: Required Elements for ALL Schools               All schools MUST complete the following questions.

    1. What are the policies and practices in place that promote proficiency of each subgroup in the core academic subjects?
       The policies and practices in place that promote proficiency of each subgroup in the core academic subjects are:
          The implementation and use of Write From The Beginning,
          Thinking Maps,
          Balanced Math,
          weekly collaboration time for grade level teachers,
          collaboration for Special Education, ESL, and regular Education teachers, and
          the inclusion model for Special Education and ESL teachers in the students’ classroom.
       Teachers are collaborating, at a minimum, monthly, to align assessments with curriculum and instruction. We are
       implementing Student Achievement Conferences quarterly to ensure all students, including IEP and ESL students, are
       showing targeted growth in core academic subjects. We have been and are continuing to use and train on DOK levels,
       Daily 5/CAFÉ strategies, and SIOP best practices.



    2. List and briefly describe, as appropriate, how the school has incorporated activities of remedial instruction or tutoring
       before school, after school, during the summer, and during any extension of the school year.
          Special Ed. Extended School Year summer school is provided to students based on IEP requirements.
          Teachers provide remediation for students in small groups that were identified below grade level by their MAPS
       and DRA scores.



    3.   Describe the resources available to the school to carry out the plan.
         The resources available are:
           ESL teacher,
           built-in collaboration time,
           Essential Skills for Reading and Math,
           Common Core State Standards for ELA and Math,


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                  Page 24 of 33
            Thinking Maps/Graphic Organizers,
            DRA tests/kits,
            Write From the Beginning,
            Balanced Math/Envision,
            hands-on manipulatives, opportunities for student conversation,
            SIOP best practices, and Daily 5/CAFÉ strategies.
         Trainers are on staff for SIOP, Write From the Beginning, and Daily 5/CAFÉ.

         Other programs in use are:
           Study Island,
           Reading Counts,
           Leap Frog School-House System,
           listening centers in every classroom, and
           an extensive and comprehensive teacher resource library.



    4. Summarize the effectiveness of any appropriations for the school made by the Legislature to improve student
       academic achievement.
       Class size reduction money for grades 1, 2, and 3.



    5.    Discuss how the school will utilize Educational Involvement Accords for Parents including the Honor Code and meet all
         the requirements of the law.
         The Educational Involvement Accord for Parents and the Honor Code has been sent home with every student, reviewed
         by families, and returned with signatures. DES staff has been working with the school’s Booster Club to increase the
         level of parent involvement. DES also has a parent involvement committee to increase the number of opportunities for
         parents to become involved with their children’s education. DES has also adopted and implemented a school-wide
         curriculum to teach character education that encourages self responsibility.



    6.   If applicable, describe how the school will make its Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO)


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                 Page 25 of 33
        targets in English language proficiency (reading, writing, listening, and speaking comprehension).
        To make our AMAO targets teachers have been and are continuing to be trained in SIOP best practices. Teachers will
        be held accountable, by principal walk-throughs, for using at least three SIOP strategies per day. The ESL teacher
        also uses an inclusion model to push in to classrooms.




Part VII: Other Required Elements & Assurances of the SIP (All schools)
All schools MUST complete this page.

           School Characteristics                         #    %                                    Title I                                   Yes         No

                 Average Daily Attendance                     95.3                                                              Eligible      x
                            Transiency Rate                   26.5                                                              Served                x
    % enrolled continuously since Count Day                   26.1                                                    Targeted Assisted       x
  Incidents of School Violence: Student-to-           11                                                                     Schoolwide           x
                                    Student
  Incidents of School Violence: Student-to-           0                     Did your school make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)?              x
                                      Staff
            % of Highly Qualified Teachers                    100%                          What was your school’s AYP Designation?           A
                                                                     Exemplary (EX), High Achieving (HA), Watch List (W), Needs Improvement
                                                                     Year 1 (N1), Needs Improvement Year 2 (N2), Needs Improvement Year 1
                                                                     Hold (N1-H), Needs Improvement Year 2 Hold (N2-H), etc.
                           Dropout Rate (HS)                  NA                        Did you appeal your latest AYP designation?                   x
                         Graduation Rate (HS)                 NA                                   Was your latest appeal granted?                    x
                                                                                      Designated as Persistently Dangerous School?                    x


007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                           Page 26 of 33
                                                               Receiving State Remediation funding?          x
                                                      Has a State SST been assigned to your school?          x




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                   Page 27 of 33
VIII. Required Elements & Assurances for Title 1 Schools

Section B:   Required Elements for Title 1 schools


1. Describe the required services the school provided based on the number of years the school has been in need of improvement,
(e.g., schools in Year 2 of “Needs Improvement” must identify Year 1 and Year 2 services, and so on).
             Year 1                          Year 2                Year 3                      Year 4                            Year 5
          School Choice               Supplemental Services   Corrective Action       Restructuring Yr 1 Planning   Restructuring Yr 2 Implementation




2. Provide an assurance that the school will not spend less than 10% of its annual Title I allocation for quality professional
development. (ONLY for Title I schools in "Needs Improvement" or "Needs Improvement Hold" status. All others may respond N/A)
N/A


3. Describe how the school will provide written notice to parents on the school’s "Needs Improvement" status.



4. Specify how Title I funds will be used continue making improvement or to remove school from "Needs Improvement" status.


5. Describe the school's teacher mentoring program and how it relates to achieving the school's annual goals and objectives.


6. Describe the school's strategies to attract high quality highly qualified teachers to your school.
One hundred percent of our staff are highly qualified teachers.

7.Describe the school's strategies to increase parent involvement in accordance with Section 1118 of NCLB, such as family literacy
services.


 8.Describe the school's plans for assisting preschool children in the transition from early childhood programs, such as Head Start,



007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                   Page 28 of 33
007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007   Page 29 of 33
IX. Additional Required Elements & Assurances for Non-Title 1 Schools
Section C: Required Elements for Non-Title 1 schools identified as “Needs Improvement” or “Needs Improvement Hold”

    1.   Describe how and when the school will provide written notice to parents on the school’s “Needs Improvement” status.




    2. Describe the school’s teacher mentoring program and how it relates to achieving the school’s annual goals and objectives.




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                     Page 30 of 33
                                                      APPENDIX A

   SCHOOL PROFILES ARE ACCEPTED BY NDE
      IN LIEU OF STATE DATA TABLES.




007
SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                Page 31 of 33
                                                                                                                              Lyon County School District
                                                                                                                                Destined for Greatness
LYON COUNTY School Improvement



                                     PARENT INVOLVEMENT CALENDAR
                                                  Parent/Community Participation
                                          (To Be Completed at the Conclusion of the School Improvement Planning Process)


   School Name __Dayton Elementary School__________ Year: __2011-1012________________________

     Activity Name                  Activity Description               School Improvement                    Date(s) of          Funding Source
  (Include Parent Involvement)                                                                                                (Ex. General Fund, Title 1, RPDP)
                                                                               Goal                           Activity
Ex. Family Math Night            Families come and learn hands         Goal 1: Increase                  October 1, 2010    Site level budget
                                 on math activities to increase        achievement in math
                                 math practice at home
Ex. ESL Family Night             Families will come to school to       Goal 2: Increase                  December 1, 2010   Site Budget
                                 learn how to read and/or              achievement in reading
                                 support family literacy
Back to School Night             Families come to meet                 Goal 1 and 2: Increase            September, 2011    Site Budget
                                 teachers discuss, classroom           achievement in Math and
                                 expectations and go through           Reading.
                                 school year goals.
Science Fair Night               Families come to do science           Neither                           March, 2012        Site Budget
                                 activities and look at science
                                 fair projects.
Family Math Night                Families come to school to do         Goal 2: Increase math             April, 2012        Site Budget
                                 hands on math activities on           achievement
                                 geometry and logic.
Spanish Story Time               Hispanic parents come to              Goal 1: Increase reading          October, 2011,     Site Budget
                                 school to get more information        achievement                       December 2011,
                                 about testing data, reading                                             February, 2012,

 007
 SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                                          Page 32 of 33
                                strategies, extra support they                               May, 2012
                                need.
Reading Mentors                 Ms. Pizur/Mrs. Reck trained       Goal 1: Increase reading   All year.   Site Budget
                                eight parents and six GT and      achievement
                                Leadership students to work
                                with students below grade level
                                in reading in third grade.




                                                                  (Add Lines If Needed)




 007
 SAGE School Improvement Plan Template, Revised 2007                                                                   Page 33 of 33

								
To top